On 2013-05-03 12:15:27 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Bruce Momjian escribió: > > On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 05:24:54PM +0200, Andres Freund wrote: > > > > The problem with an extra metadata fork is that it essentially would > > > double the files in a cluster and it would also noticeably increase the > > > amount of open files we need. > > > There have been quite some complaints about CREATE DATABASE speed, I > > > am not sure we want to make it even slower :( > > > > Agreed. We start to get into file system performance issues at that > > point. I have often wondered if we need to create hash the files into > > subdirectories for databases with many tables. Has anyone profiled > > this? > > Modern filesystems use trees to store file nowadays, not linear arrays, > and so that old scenario (long time to find one specific directory entry > within a directory containing lots of files) is no longer that serious a > problem.
Absolutely. Also, we normally shouldn't open/close files constantly since we cache open files so open(2) performance shouldn't be *that* critical. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
